Another report of Samuel being someone who could possibly be traded

[Jesse]

6 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

I'd swap him for Malik Hooker

He only has one more year of his contract plus a team option. He's yet to play a full season and has similar stats to Tre Boston. I'm good.

[TheCasillas]

10 minutes ago, Jesse said:

He only has one more year of his contract plus a team option. He's yet to play a full season and has similar stats to Tre Boston. I'm good.

Hooker has played the same amount of game as Curtis Samuel.... Samuel is now a contract year 3WR with a stacked WR class and plenty of depth at the position on the roster currently. Since it would be a trade, we wouldnt have to pay Hooker's full final year of his contract (without the option)... Lastly that final year cap hit... is only 4million.... When hooker is on the field, he is an absolute game changer. We have a bigger need for hooker than we do samuel. 

 

Hooker has struggled to stay healthy in his career, missing 14 of a possible 48 games since joining the Colts as the No. 15 overall pick in 2017, but remains a true game changer when available.  -michael lombardi

[LinvilleGorge]

4 hours ago, TheMaulClaw said:

Samuel and a 4th for a 2nd. Would you do it?

I would, but I think we could probably only get a 4th or a 5th. There are likely to be WR options available on the board that a team would rather use that 3rd on a WR who they'll have on a cheap rookie contract for years vs. on Samuel who they'd have to be re-signing after this season.

[Moo Daeng]

On 4/20/2020 at 12:22 PM, WarPanthers89 said:

Where there is smoke...fire? This has been brought up multiple times this offseason, and the latest is CBS sports in an article just posted yesterday. Any way you see this happening? I know a team source stated before that we are not shopping Samuel, but we all know how that goes...

 

That's not another report. It's the the same guy linking to his own report. The same report from earlier in the month.

[ericr0319]

what is fair value for him that a team will pay? give Rhule/Brady as many weapons as possible to give Teddy. The more we have the better suited we are. Even bringing in Anderson I can see us taking a WR in this LOADED class. There are literally 25 NFL WRs in this class. I would love a big redzone guy that can stretch the field with his size. Give me Gabrielle Davis in the 4th round out of UCF. 

[Mr. Scot]

On 4/21/2020 at 4:54 PM, 45catfan said:

Can we put this stupid rumor to bed now?

Roaring Riot has said that the "not shopping him but will listen to offers" take is basically correct.

[LinvilleGorge]

It'll be interesting to see if that approach shifts if we draft Lamb tonight. If we take a WR in the first three rounds, I think we have to transition to actively shopping Samuel.

[45catfan]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Roaring Riot has said that the "not shopping him but will listen to offers" take is basically correct.

I'm assuming outside of a handful of players, that could be true for most of the team.

[Madwolf]

28 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It'll be interesting to see if that approach shifts if we draft Lamb tonight. If we take a WR in the first three rounds, I think we have to transition to actively shopping Samuel.

This is why I hate the idea of taking a WR in Day 1 or 2.

You have to move a WR, and hope that some team is willing to pay for Samuels in order to get back any where near an equal draft capital for the following draft.

If he turns into a stud WR, you have to decide if you keep Moore around on a big contract.

Sure no one is ever going to complain about having a wealth of talent at WR, but in either scenario we've lost out on a player at a dire position of need, and you very well may end up with a pool of talent that is less than what you started with at WR over the long haul. It's like picking to what degree you want to lose.